Re: Complex/Imaginary numbers

• Subject: Re: Complex/Imaginary numbers
• From: Rob Myers <robm@lostwax.com>
• Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 06:15:05 -0500 (EST)
• Organization: Lost Wax Media Ltd.
• References: <802904$2sk$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <m3bt965ooa.fsf@soma.andreas.org>
• Xref: grapevine.lcs.mit.edu comp.lang.dylan:11052

Reluctantly putting on my language lawyer hat again: this is another D++
feature. It alters the character of the language and is non-standard. Postfix
creation of a pair is a different matter to prefix creation of a bignum, and
this *should* be handled using make, or an i() function. :-(
Adding this would however be cool. :-)

- Rob.

Andreas Bogk wrote:

> so supporting the notation for complex literals would be natural. If
> anybody has objections, please raise them now ;).

• Re: Complex/Imaginary numbers
• From: brucehoult@pobox.com (Bruce Hoult)

• Complex/Imaginary numbers
• From: dauclair@hotmail.com
• Re: Complex/Imaginary numbers
• From: Andreas Bogk <andreas@andreas.org>

• Prev: Re: Complex/Imaginary numbers
• Next: Re: Complex/Imaginary numbers
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread